Hobsons latest idiot article

[mgilgris]

Per Bengals.com

Mock of ages

By GEOFF HOBSON

March 6, 2008

Posted: 2:20 p.m.

With the Bengals attacking one of their defensive needs in free agency in the person of pass-rusher Antwan Odom, is it time—dare we breathe it—to think about the offensive side of the ball at No. 9 in the April 26-27 NFL Draft?

Or is it time to think about trading up for a dominant defensive tackle or down to get a couple of potential defensive starters? Fact is, the Odom signing opens it up to just about anything, offense or defense.

In the first of several Bengals.com Media Mock Drafts in an effort to gauge what will happen before the Bengals pick, one thing is clear: They'll have multiple chances to trade up if they desire, but keep in mind they've only done it once in 40 drafts.

Here is the media's take a week after digesting the results of the NFL scouting combine. Obviously there can't be trades, but the exercise is to see which players figure to be gone when.

1. MIAMI: DE Chris Long, Virginia; Alex Marvez, FoxSports.com — Not your classic behemoth stand-up defensive end in the 3-4, but then how many classic 3-4s are out there, anyway? The Tuna has to love the Al Groh connection and the kid's brains and athleticism. They'll be able to make it work. Plus, how much longer does Jason Taylor have?

2. ST. LOUIS: LT Jake Long, Michigan; Howard Balzer, The Sports Xchange — It's hard to get a read on the Rams with new personnel exec Billy Devaney running the show. They could go for the running back or a pass rusher, but Long is such a long-term lock and Orlando Pace and Alex Baron don't look to be long-term options.

3. ATLANTA: DT Glenn Dorsey. LSU; Steve Wyche, Atlanta Journal-Constitution — They seem to be convinced that Dorsey's medical outlook isn't as bad as reported last month at the NFL scouting combine. And it's a real need. They jettisoned Rod Coleman and Trey Lewis is coming off major knee surgery.

4. OAKLAND: RB Darren McFadden, Arkansas; John Czarnecki, FoxSports.com — The Raiders cleaned house of all their running backs except Justin Fargas and there is no receiver worthy here. McFadden is the real deal. The reason the Cowboys are so excited about him, The Czar says, is because he's so good catching the ball.

5. KANSAS CITY: LT Ryan Clady, Boise State; Adam Teicher, Kansas City Star — If the desire to trade down hasn't reached fever pitch, it will by now. Particularly if Jake Long isn't here for the Chiefs. If they can't move, KC would grab Clady as they look at a beleaguered offensive line that needs three new starters.

6. JETS: DE Vernon Gholston, Ohio State; Rich Cimini, New York Daily News — McFadden would be an intriguing pick here for a team that has a solid singles hitter but not a home-run threat in Thomas Jones. Gholston projects to the Jets 3-4 defense, but it's still a projection because it wasn't exactly a Buckeyes staple.

7. NEW ENGLAND: DT Sedrick Ellis, USC; Mike Reiss, The Boston Globe — The Patriots could very well take a fifth-round pick RIGHT NOW just to get down to No. 9. But if they have to hang in there and Ellis is still on the board, it makes absolute sense. D-linemen Richard Seymour, Vince Wilfork and Jarvis Green are all free agents after '09 and the Patriots love to reload on both lines. Since 2000, five of their nine first-round selections have been offensive or defensive linemen and three have been on the D-line. And they're due. They've gone running back-safety the last two years.

8. BALTIMORE: CB Leodis McKelvin, Troy; Don Banks, SI.com — Ravens cornerbacks Samari Rolle and Chris McAlister aren't as young as they used to be for a franchise that lives on defense. Time to young it up at one of the game's most important positions.

9. CINCINNATI: ????????

It would appear it's a reach for a defensive lineman, but if Ellis slides that long would the Bengals go up and get him with their extra picks?

And it may be too high for Pittsburgh tackle Jeff Otah. Plus, the Bengals are already so loaded at tackle that their franchise player has the fourth-most NFL starts at tackle on the team.

The draft's best linebacker would still be there in USC's Keith Rivers, and it appears he could play in a 3-4 or 4-3. But a top 10 pick has to change games, right, and does a linebacker get much of an opportunity to do that?

In the last seven drafts, only two linebackers have gone in the top 10 and they both went in '06 when A.J. Hawk went to the Packers at No. 5 and Ernie Sims went to the Lions at No. 9. They were the first top 10 linebackers since LaVar Arrington went No. 2 to Washington and Brian Urlacher No. 9 to Chicago in 2000.

It looks like the Bengals are going 4-3 and would the signing of Odom figure to take any end/outside linebacker off the board in at least the first couple of rounds? Or would they still take a pass rusher for depth at a thin spot?

But is offense that far-fetched when the draft's top wideout is going to be there and the draft's second-best running back?

Oklahoma's Malcolm Kelly (Getty Images)

At this point the receiver would be Oklahoma's Malcolm Kelly, a 6-3, 218-pound junior who isn't a burner but has a knack for getting open deep and scoring in the red zone with 16.8 yards per his 49 catches for nine touchdowns last season. And he's said to have the best hands in the draft.

Chad Johnson and T.J. Houshmandzadeh are brilliant, but they are also 30. The salary cap hit on the Odom deal (about $6 million) is the latest reason the Bengals can't/won't trade Johnson, and Johnson and Houshmandzadeh still have plenty of productive years left.

Yet look behind them. With Chris Henry always a question mark, Tab Perry unsigned, and Antonio Chatman trying to come back from injury, would it be fair to say that any time the Bengals pick a wide receiver No. 1 in the Carson Palmer era it's not a wasted pick?

The idea of drafting a running back at No. 9 is horrifying to many after taking Chris Perry in the first round four years ago and Kenny Irons in the second round last year. But if the best defense is a good offense and a running game that keeps the defense off the field ...

According to the Media Mock, the Bengals will have a shot at the consensus top trio of backs in Oregon's Jonathan Stewart, as well as McFadden's teammate at Arkansas, Felix Jones, and Illinois' Rashard Mendenhall.

The 6-foot, 200-pound Jones could solve a lot of ills in the kick return game, where he had two touchdowns, and he runs with power and was durable enough to rush for 1,162 yards. The 5-11, 232-pound Stewart has bell-cow size and though he won't run away from defenders he's a good enough contact runner to have had a 1,722-yard junior year. The 5-11, 210-pound Mendenhall has 4.48 speed, good size, and displayed a nice nose in the red zone in 2007 with 19 touchdowns.

It's hard to see the Bengals giving up picks to trade up. They are hosting restricted free-agent tight end Ben Utecht on Thursday and they have to weigh signing a veteran pass-catching tight end against getting a young one in the first four rounds or so.

The consensus best, USC's Fred Davis, probably won't go until late first or early second. So they'll have a shot at a pretty good tight end in the second, where they pick 15th in the round. They'll go 14th in round three, 13th in four, 12th in five, 11th in six, and 10th in seven.

[HoosierCat]

I could very easily see RB at 9...WR is more of a stretch but the need is definitely there. As long as the Bengals continue to spend their FA dollars on D -- Pats S Eugene Wilson is the latest defender they are interested in, per Curnutte -- and if all the top linemen are off the board at 9 (as they are here), I would definitely be open to it.

[mgilgris]

The only positions I agree in having multiple backups and spending the money this year is on the lines. The battle is won and lost in the trenches.

In another note TKO Spikes was released by the eagles today per cbssportsline.com

[mgilgris]

Eagles keep working on defense, release LB Spikes

March 6, 2008

CBSSports.com wire reports

PHILADELPHIA -- The Philadelphia Eagles released two-time Pro Bowl linebacker Takeo Spikes on Thursday.

The 10-year veteran played one season in Philadelphia and finished second on the team with 139 tackles. Spikes missed the final two games last season after having shoulder surgery.

Spikes is the second high-profile player cut by the Eagles in a week. Defensive end Jevon Kearse was let go last Thursday after playing four seasons in Philadelphia.

The Eagles signed All-Pro cornerback Asante Samuel and defensive end Chris Clemons in the first two days of the NFL's free-agency period.

per cbs

[Defender]

But a top 10 pick has to change games...

Since there will be none available at #9, this is why you take whatever someone is willing to offer on draft day, namely while the Bengals are on the clock, and move down, hopefully mid to late 1st and take a lineman slotted appropriately. Because even if they only get a 4th rounder, it's better than over drafting.

[Jet23]

Atlanta needs so much help. The Bengals should be burning their phone lines up trying to work a deal. Swapping ones and throwing in a four sounds fair.

[JoePong]

I don't know what's wrong with that. Our offense has been horrible the last two years. We don't know if we have a RB. Our WRs are getting old, and you need to make sure Carson always has some top notch WRs.

People who think like this are the same ones who wanted to take Justin Smith over Ladainian Tomlinson becasue we had "need." Well, I guarantee you Tomlinson would have been responsible for a lot more bengal wins than Justin ever was.

[mgilgris]

JoePong- I would hope that one of our 4 RB's 2 of which came in recent first or second rounds would fill that void.

Mikey B fools people by building up the offense constantly to make the game interesting but hardly wins the big games. Look at the good teams in the past couple of years, the common factor is they had a defense that could hold up. It put the Colts from good to a super bowl champ, it carried the Squeelers through the superbowl run and it definitely won the game for the Giants last year.

Dumb moves like drafting a RB again to build up our offense is what keeps our team mediocre and frustrating to watch. Sure draft a WR or RB, but be willing to not complain when our defense allows 30 points or SD to put up 30 plus in a half.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

Atlanta needs so much help. The Bengals should be burning their phone lines up trying to work a deal. Swapping ones and throwing in a four sounds fair.

According to the old chart used by Jimmy Johnson, that's not even remotely close. According to this chart, it would take all our first day picks. Forget it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/news/story?id=2410670,

[BengalszoneBilly]

The only positions I agree in having multiple backups and spending the money this year is on the lines. The battle is won and lost in the trenches.

Look at the good teams in the past couple of years, the common factor is they had a defense that could hold up. It put the Colts from good to a super bowl champ, it carried the Squeelers through the superbowl run and it definitely won the game for the Giants last year.

Dumb moves like drafting a RB again to build up our offense is what keeps our team mediocre and frustrating to watch. Sure draft a WR or RB, but be willing to not complain when our defense allows 30 points or SD to put up 30 plus in a half.

Gilgris, you're preaching to the choir here brother. A great couple of posts.

[membengal]

Not this choir.

Still wouldn't mind offense early and often, for all the reasons I laid out two months back.

[membengal]

From my post on Dec. 31 at 7:40 pm (happy new year's eve!):

Starting with the 2004 draft (which you say is the timeframe for what has "plagued" this team):

6 offensive players taken in the first four rounds (three in the top 2 rounds)

13 defensive players taken in the first four rounds (5 in the top 2 rounds)

Only 1 wide receiver in that span. Only three offensive lineman in that group in that span (one of whom is Andrews, a massive project). No TEs in that span. And we are supporting our franchise $100 million dollar quarterback, how, exactly?

Just saying "PICK DEFENSE" doesn't begin to address the issue with this team. Not even close.

From my post on Jan. 1 at 1:44 am (happy new year!):

"We HAVE been picking DEFENSE on DAY 1. Just sayin'. It's not as simple as now chirping in 2008 "DAY 1!" "DEFENSE!" and expecting everyone to fall into line. I will not be falling into that line. Not even close.

Oh by the way, out of the mere six first four round offensive picks in the last four drafts? Two have been horribly hurt, and one suspended beyond assistance to the team and within one more oopsie of being gone forever. That means, in the last four years, we have exactly three first four round offensive draft choices available to help this team's alleged strength...Andrews (still a massive project from the 4th round), Whitworth, and Ghuiciac (another 4th rounder). That's it. Hell, in that view, we have only one day 1 pick in the last four years healthy, non-suspension worries, etc., and that's Whitworth. Why is the offense having issues? Start with that fact.

So, yeah, count on me saying loudly and longly for months that this team canNOT ignore the offense on the first day another year. It just can't. Ignoring the offense on draft day, coupled with bad injury luck and what not, was in large measure responsible for this offenses's woes in 2007.

And, I say again, this franchise would be well served not to waste its Carson Palmer years. But it is taking significant steps toward doing just that.

ETA: In my above list, I didn't include Ahmad Brooks. He's in effect a 1st day defensive pick.

Make it 6 first four round offensive picks and 14 first four round defensive picks starting with the 2004 draft...

[HairOnFire]

Translating Hobson...

"With the ninth pick in the 2008 NFL draft, the bastard sons of Paul Brown select....a WR who'll allow them to trade Chad Johnson NEXT season..."

[BengalszoneBilly]

Not this choir.

Still wouldn't mind offense early and often, for all the reasons I laid out two months back.

Right. I'll just jot you down for wanting more of the same.

[cincyhokie]

Atlanta needs so much help. The Bengals should be burning their phone lines up trying to work a deal. Swapping ones and throwing in a four sounds fair.

According to the old chart used by Jimmy Johnson, that's not even remotely close. According to this chart, it would take all our first day picks. Forget it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/news/story?id=2410670,

I don't necessarily agree. I think if there is a team, say the Falcons, that are looking for a QB or another position that they think they can get at #9 they may be interested in picking up another pick.

How about the Bengals round 2 or 3 and the #9 for the Falcons #5?

Along with that, I think it would be worth moving up 4 spots to get an Ellis, Dorsey, or Gholston. By putting a difference maker on the DL in round one you've made the defense MUCH stronger with just one pick. After that it's not nearly as hard to put some focus on the offensive side of the team. OL, TE, WR, RB.

The Bengals have a good amount of picks. They need to use them wisely. They need to be aggressive this year and not let things come to them and react.

[membengal]

Not this choir.

Still wouldn't mind offense early and often, for all the reasons I laid out two months back.

Right. I'll just jot you down for wanting more of the same.

Sigh.

Did you even read what I pasted from my take on this a few months back? MORE OF THE SAME would be drafting defense on day 1 to the exclusion of the offense. However you want to spin that, go ahead and try, but I continue to hold that it is lunacy to waste the prime years of a franchise quarterback. And that is what they are on the way to doing by not infusing the talent around Palmer on offense with high draft choices. Again, of the mere six players taken in rounds 1-4 from 2004 to the present who play offense, only one has been completely healthy---Whitworth. Perry and Irons broke. Andrews has been a project who may pan out. Henry, who is one mistake from never being heard from again. And Ghuiciac, who is uneven at best. Why did the offense has problems with consistency last year? Because key parts around Palmer aged and broke. Period.

So, no, I won't call Hobson crazy for musing about whether offense makes sense at 9 in the first round, because it is a fair question. And not one that should be easily dismissed. At all.

[bengalsfansince68]

By putting a difference maker on the DL in round one you've made the defense MUCH stronger with just one pick.

Can you enlighten us as to how you plan to move up 4 spots and only use one pick to get that player?

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

I don't necessarily agree. I think if there is a team, say the Falcons, that are looking for a QB or another position that they think they can get at #9 they may be interested in picking up another pick.

How about the Bengals round 2 or 3 and the #9 for the Falcons #5?

Along with that, I think it would be worth moving up 4 spots to get an Ellis, Dorsey, or Gholston. By putting a difference maker on the DL in round one you've made the defense MUCH stronger with just one pick. After that it's not nearly as hard to put some focus on the offensive side of the team. OL, TE, WR, RB.

The Bengals have a good amount of picks. They need to use them wisely. They need to be aggressive this year and not let things come to them and react.

Falcons are at #3, not #5, so according to the trade chart it'd be pretty expensive. They might start getting interested if it was the #9 and the Bengals' second rounder, but only if Ryan goes to the Dolphins. But it would definitely take more than the 4th rounder first mentioned.

I agree that moving up a pick or 3 would be good. I'd be talking to teams between about 5-8.

[JoePong]

JoePong- I would hope that one of our 4 RB's 2 of which came in recent first or second rounds would fill that void.

Mikey B fools people by building up the offense constantly to make the game interesting but hardly wins the big games. Look at the good teams in the past couple of years, the common factor is they had a defense that could hold up. It put the Colts from good to a super bowl champ, it carried the Squeelers through the superbowl run and it definitely won the game for the Giants last year.

Dumb moves like drafting a RB again to build up our offense is what keeps our team mediocre and frustrating to watch. Sure draft a WR or RB, but be willing to not complain when our defense allows 30 points or SD to put up 30 plus in a half.

No, drafting a Justin Smith instead of a Ladainian Tomlinson out of need is what keeps teams mediocre.

[cincyhokie]

By putting a difference maker on the DL in round one you've made the defense MUCH stronger with just one pick.

Can you enlighten us as to how you plan to move up 4 spots and only use one pick to get that player?

Sure. You move up 4 spots by trading a 2nd or 3rd round pick and the #9 for a higher pick. This obviously would only work if a team knew they could get the player they wanted at #9. Like DC mentioned this would probably only be possible with the 5-8 teams. By strengthening the defense with one pick I meant that the Bengals would get more impact out of an Ellis or Dorsey than the usual mid first rounder and a 2nd or third round pick.

This leads to my next point. If Ellis, Gholston, or Dorsey don't look like they are going to make it to #9, I gurantee you the Bengals will trade down. If they do that they will end up with the same caliber 1st round draft picks that they have taken in the last few years....a good solid contributer, but not a difference maker.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Not this choir.

Still wouldn't mind offense early and often, for all the reasons I laid out two months back.

Right. I'll just jot you down for wanting more of the same.

Sigh.

Did you even read what I pasted from my take on this a few months back? MORE OF THE SAME would be drafting defense on day 1 to the exclusion of the offense. However you want to spin that, go ahead and try, but I continue to hold that it is lunacy to waste the prime years of a franchise quarterback. And that is what they are on the way to doing by not infusing the talent around Palmer on offense with high draft choices. Again, of the mere six players taken in rounds 1-4 from 2004 to the present who play offense, only one has been completely healthy---Whitworth. Perry and Irons broke. Andrews has been a project who may pan out. Henry, who is one mistake from never being heard from again. And Ghuiciac, who is uneven at best. Why did the offense has problems with consistency last year? Because key parts around Palmer aged and broke. Period.

So, no, I won't call Hobson crazy for musing about whether offense makes sense at 9 in the first round, because it is a fair question. And not one that should be easily dismissed. At all.

By more of the same, I meant the defense getting it's ass handed to it on a regular basis. Little pressure on the opposing QB giving their receivers more than adequate time to find an opening, therefore keeping OUR offense off the field.

I'm not spinning anything. That's the way it was and will continue to be unless the defensive problems are addressed. Just because defensive players were chosen early in years past does not mean it should be out of the question now.

[DesperateDerelict]

By more of the same, I meant the defense getting it's ass handed to it on a regular basis. Little pressure on the opposing QB giving their receivers more than adequate time to find an opening, therefore keeping OUR offense off the field.

I'm not spinning anything. That's the way it was and will continue to be unless the defensive problems are addressed. Just because defensive players were chosen early in years past does not mean it should be out of the question now.

Billy -

I agree, but !!

If there is an elite offensive talent available at #9, and no correspondingly elite talent at a position of need, AND we can't trade down to get extra picks . . .

Then, by all means, get the elite talent. With the exception of QB, there isn't a position that we can't use.

If McFadden or M. Ryan are there, we can probably trade down (Chicago, Carolina, or Dallas). If they're gone, and there is no DL or LB worthy of a top ten, then get the remaining elite talent!!! (Probably Clady, McKelvin, Jenkins, or Williams).

[HairOnFire]

Atlanta needs so much help. The Bengals should be burning their phone lines up trying to work a deal. Swapping ones and throwing in a four sounds fair.

According to the old chart used by Jimmy Johnson, that's not even remotely close. According to this chart, it would take all our first day picks. Forget it.

Exactly. That's the same value chart I refer to when discussing potential trades. It's been around for more than a decade.

However, it should be noted that there was some discussion of a new trade value chart being passed around during the NFL meetings in Hawaii, and again during the scouting combine at Indy. I don't have a link or article to post, but Adam Schefter of the NFL Network was the source.

In a nutshell, teams drafting in the top five aren't able to trade down as often as they'd like to due to the reluctance of potential trade partners to pay a heavy price in draft picks AND the staggering salary costs. As a result the value of the highest picks is scaled back, not up.

As always, take it for whatever it might be worth.

[membengal]

So...they let the offense fall into disrepair chasing what they have not had on defense? At some point some of the vast numbers of first four round defensive picks they have invested in have to stand up and live up to what they are supposed to be.

Go back, billy, and look again at all the first four round picks on D. I won't holler if they go first round defense (AGAIN) this year, but only if an elite DT slips to them. If the elite are gone, and they reach past an offensive guy they desperately need for a "solid" defender, then I will holler. The offense needs attention. Massive attention. Again, they have invested one hundred million dollars in Carson Palmer. He is in his prime. He needs a running game. He needs receivers. He needs blockers. The running game is broken. The receivers are aging rapidly (and are unstable). The line is older than dirt at key positions. They ignore all of that again, as they generally have over the last four drafts, and I will wait for the screaming when the offense is once again unable to move the ball in the red zone, control clock, block, or any of the rest of it that failed the Bengals in 2007.

btw: Signing Odom helps a ton at letting them do just what I want them to...invest some high round talent back in the offense.

[BengalszoneBilly]

By more of the same, I meant the defense getting it's ass handed to it on a regular basis. Little pressure on the opposing QB giving their receivers more than adequate time to find an opening, therefore keeping OUR offense off the field.

I'm not spinning anything. That's the way it was and will continue to be unless the defensive problems are addressed. Just because defensive players were chosen early in years past does not mean it should be out of the question now.

Billy -

I agree, but !!

If there is an elite offensive talent available at #9, and no correspondingly elite talent at a position of need, AND we can't trade down to get extra picks . . .

Then, by all means, get the elite talent. With the exception of QB, there isn't a position that we can't use.

If McFadden or M. Ryan are there, we can probably trade down (Chicago, Carolina, or Dallas). If they're gone, and there is no DL or LB worthy of a top ten, then get the remaining elite talent!!! (Probably Clady, McKelvin, Jenkins, or Williams).

I see what you're saying Desperate, and I think I see what membengal said as well, but being an aircraft mechanic, my mind works in a specific flow chart to fix nagging problems. Example: If the main discrepancy keeping the jet from flying is in the computer navigation system, changing a perfectly good tire instead because I have no nav parts available at that moment still gets me no closer to getting this bird airborne, so I like your idea about trading down. Get more of the parts you need to fix your main problem.

Basically the only time I liked Cincinnati taking the BPA was in '03 with Carson Palmer. That worked. I feel they tried that route again in '04, and we got Chrissy Perry.